Welcome to the annual shareholders meeting for JPMorgan Chase & Co., which will be led by Jamie Dimon, Chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase.
Good morning, folks. It is 10:00 A.M., and I'm pleased to call to order the annual meeting of shareholders of JPMorgan Chase & Co. I'm Jamie Dimon, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, and I'm the Chair of this meeting. With me today is Stacey Friedman, our General Counsel. Stacey will serve as Secretary of this meeting and will lead us through the formalities and the agenda. Also with us are Jeremy Barnum, our Chief Financial Officer, and Mikael Grubb, our Head of Investor Relations, who will be reading questions submitted by our shareholders. Stacey?
Thank you, Jamie. I want to add my welcome to everyone joining us today. As for the business of the meeting, I have the affidavit, mailing of the notice of the meeting, the proxy statement, the form of the proxy, and the annual report. A list of shareholders of record was made available for inspection as described in our proxy statement. The representatives of American Election Services LLC have been appointed to serve as inspectors of the election and are with us virtually today. Dan, our Audit Partner from PricewaterhouseCoopers, is with us by phone. The meeting is properly convened. A quorum is present, and the proposed resolution set forth in the proxy statement will be filed as part of these proceedings. It is 10:01 A.M., and the polls on all proposals set forth in the proxy statement are now open and will remain open until we announce they have been closed.
Please note that if we experience technical issues such as a loss of audio or webcast, we ask that shareholders and guests stand by, allow us time to try and resolve the issue, and resume the meeting, or otherwise provide an update related to the meeting. If a technical disruption occurs that prevents us from continuing the meeting, the polls will be closed immediately. The votes received prior to the time the polls were closed will be counted, and the meeting will not be reconvened. The vote results will be announced publicly afterwards. This meeting is being conducted solely through remote communication. You'll be able to participate in the meeting by voting and submitting questions through our virtual meeting website. You may submit questions at any time. I do encourage you to do so now.
Our meeting agenda and rules of conduct for this meeting are provided on our virtual meeting website and will be strictly followed. Because this is a meeting of our stockholders, only shareholders who are holders of record on March 21 are permitted to vote and submit questions during the meeting. In order to vote or ask a question, please follow the directions on the website and in the rules of conduct. To allow us an opportunity to answer other shareholder questions, each shareholder will be limited to two questions. We received proxies up until just before the beginning of this meeting representing over 85% of the outstanding shares eligible to vote, and they have been voted in accordance with shareholder wishes. If there are shareholders present who have not yet voted, we ask that you take the opportunity to vote now using the link provided.
Your votes will be recorded and reflected in the final vote results. Our remarks today may contain forward-looking statements. Please refer to our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC for a disclaimer regarding such statements. That completes the necessary formalities. Jamie will now introduce the directors and comment on the state of the company.
I'd like to recognize our incumbent director nominees who are joining us today. With me in the room is Stephen Burke, our lead independent director. Our other board members have joined virtually. They are Linda Bammann, Michelle Buck, who joined the board earlier this year, Todd Combs, Alyssa Balder-Davis, Alex Gorsky, Melody Hobson, Phoebe Novakovic, Ginni Rometty, Greg Smith, who also joined our board earlier this year, and Mark Weinberger. I'm very proud to tell you that the dedication of the directors plays a huge part in making this the great company that it is. I would also like to encourage you to read the letter that was written by our lead independent director, which is included in this year's proxy statement. Sorry, read this now. I'd like to give some comments about the state of the company and issues that we're all facing.
As I wrote in my annual letter to shareholders last month, 2024 was another year of significant challenges across the globe. From a terrible war in Ukraine to ongoing terrorist activity and growing geopolitical tensions, it was a time of profound uncertainty and turmoil. Our hearts go out to those who have been impacted by these events. While we will do our part to ensure that the global economy is safe and secure, JPMorgan Chase is not immune to the effects of these events. There are two things absolutely foundational to our firm's long-term success. The first is whether we run a great company. The second, which may also be more important, is whether the long-term health of America and the future of the free and democratic world are strong. Before I discuss these topics, I want to note that 2024 is another strong year for JPMorgan Chase.
Our firm generated record revenue for the seventh consecutive year. We reported managed revenue in 2024 of $180.6 billion and net income of $58.5 billion, with a return on tangible common equity of 20%, reflecting strong underlying performance across our businesses. We also increased our quarterly common dividend of $1.05 per share to $1.15 per share in the first quarter and again to $1.25 per share in the third quarter of 2024, while continuing to reinforce our fortress balance sheet. We grew market share in several of our businesses, continued to make significant investments in products, people, and technology, and exercised strong risk disciplines. We continue to play an essential role in advancing global economic growth. We extended credit and raised capital totaling $2.8 trillion for our consumer and institutional clients around the world.
We moved more than $10 trillion a day in more than 120 currencies and in 160 countries, as well as safeguarded more than $35 trillion in assets. As I said, our success is predicated on whether we run a great company. The last five years have been a profound period of significant growth for us across our businesses and across geographies. Despite our achievements, we recognize there are real business challenges, and I want to share a few ways we're addressing them. We bring an investor-owner mindset to drive organic growth. We are fortunate to be able to drive organic growth in virtually every part of our company and at healthy returns. We are constantly assessing the landscape and expect to see significant competition. We need to be nimble and use our capabilities to both innovate and stay ahead.
If you want to have a little fun, you can go to YouTube and look at management learnings, heavily edited about how we want to stay ahead and make sure we aren't complacent, arrogant, or bureaucratic. Our largest risk is geopolitical risk. We constantly evaluate a range of potential scenarios to ensure we can handle them, from cyberattacks to other large risks such as war, energy disruptions, and ongoing global threats. We try to analyze and make sure we can handle not just the immediate effects on our company, but also the effects on clients and any repercussions on markets and the global economy. The economy, inflation, interest rates, asset prices, and trade wars are always top of mind. While we always hope for the best, we prepare for a full range of outcomes. Even with fairly extreme outcomes, our company would remain healthy.
Finally, one of JPMorgan's roles in the global financial system is to educate ourselves, our clients, and countries around the world about companies, markets, and critical economic issues. With a team of over 700 senior analysts, we perform extensive research on more than 5,000 companies in over 75 countries, spanning more than 20 specific sectors. Just as important as whether we run a great company, and perhaps even more important, is the long-term health of America domestically and the future of the free and democratic world. As America's global leadership is being challenged outside our borders by other nations and inside our borders by a polarized electorate, I want to outline five things our nation needs to do well in order to secure our future. First, we need to celebrate America's values and virtues with humility in order to restore civic pride, citizenship, and purpose.
To be able to attack our problems at home and abroad, we must be strong, and our core strength is based upon our commitment to our values as well as our ability to work hard and think intelligently about our problems. If the soul of America is not strong, the rest will be weak. While we should acknowledge America's flaws, they should not be used to pull apart our country. Second, we should acknowledge and fix our problems at home by regaining common sense and being resolute. While I cite nearly a dozen grievances in my letter, I want to touch on three that are causing legitimate frustration and anger in the country. While red tape has always meant excessive paperwork, bureaucracy, and regulations, it has been taken to a whole new level by people who really like it and want even more of it.
They have doubled down on regulation and bureaucracy, which dramatically increases red tape. Therefore, I've renamed it blue tape. Even when blue tape has been shown to slow down economic growth and make it hard for businesses and individuals to thrive, those who created it excuse the outcome and refuse to change. Equal opportunity is clearly not fairly shared. Our very low-income citizens experience higher school dropout rates, greater joblessness, increased drug use, and crime in the neighborhoods, along with significantly worse health outcomes. Many inner-city schools graduate under 50% of the students, and in both high schools and colleges, we don't teach enough skills that lead to well-paying jobs. This affects the bottom-income tier far more. Whether it's unions fighting new technologies or businesses getting tax-free, the selfish and parochial focus needs to stop.
When America's future hangs in the balance and when special interest groups wield undue influence, it is time to prioritize principle over profit and put country before company or union. Third, we must recognize the best strategy for America's success is to implement effective domestic policies that drive robust economic growth that benefit all citizens. We need to address the underlying issues causing the grievances that are tearing us apart and holding the nation back. By enacting meaningful policy reforms to resolve these issues, I believe our GDP could grow over 3% a year, benefiting all Americans, especially those in our lower-income communities. Fourth, we should initiate comprehensive economic foreign policy to win the new global economic war. America will be first, but not if it is alone. America's extraordinary standing in world affairs is predicated on our economic, military, and moral strengths.
We are in a new world defined by shifting power dynamics, rapid technological disruption, and rising geopolitical tensions. Our long-term strategic goals should be crystal clear: to maintain the cohesion and strength of the Western world, including their economies. If the Western world's military and economic alliances were to fragment, America itself would inevitably weaken over time. Fifth, we must affirm that our national security and the world's best military at whatever cost are paramount and necessary fees. As President Ronald Reagan once wisely said, "The only way to stay safe is peace through strength." Having the best military is expensive, but it's not nearly as expensive as dealing with what would happen without it. We must maintain the world's largest military without question.
In closing, I want to share that the success of JPMorgan Chase has always been predicated on the success of the United States of America and the health of the world, particularly the strength of the free and democratic countries. It's been more than 20 years since the JPMorgan Chase-Bank One merger, and it's been an extraordinary journey. I want to express my heartfelt appreciation and respect for the tremendous character and capabilities of the management team that got us through the good times and the bad times to where we are today. I'd like to express my deep gratitude to the 300,000 employees and their families of JPMorgan Chase for recognizing the all-standard and the shoulders of many others who came before us in building this exceptional company. Lastly, I want to thank our members of the show for placing their trust in us. That concludes my remarks.
Back to you, Stacey.
Thank you, Jamie. It's now time to turn to the proposals and the proxy statement. I will introduce the management proposals and then invite shareholder proponents to introduce theirs. After all the proposals have been introduced, we'll respond to shareholder questions, including questions that were submitted prior to the meeting. After the polls have been closed, we will hold a 30-minute general Q&A, during which we'll address general questions, including questions submitted prior to the meeting. I now move all of the management proposals as set forth in the proxy statement. These are four. First, election of the 12 nominees listed in our proxy statement as directors. Second, an advisory resolution to approve executive compensation. Third, ratification of the independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers. I will now ask the shareholders to introduce their proposals.
Proponents, as stated in our rules of conduct for this meeting, we ask that you limit your time to three minutes and combine your comments to the subject matter of the proposal being presented. Proposal four was submitted by John Chevedden. We've asked Mr. Chevedden to present this proposal. Mr. Chevedden, are you on the line?
Hello, this is John Chevedden. Proposal four, independent board chairman. Chose to request the board of directors adopt an enduring policy and then the governing documents in order that two separate people hold the office of the chairman and the office of the CEO. Whenever possible, the chairman of the board shall be an independent director. This proposal topic won 47% support at the 2021 JPM annual meeting. It takes much more JPM shareholder conviction on the merits of this proposal to vote for this shareholder proposal than to automatically vote according to the JPM board director's instructions. There are at least two ways 47% support can be considered: 50-plus support vote at JPM. This 47% vote was especially impressive because this proposal had to swim upstream against the repeated Madison Avenue type special solicitations sent to the JPM shareholders who have no access to independent proxy voting advice.
This 2025 proposal has to swim upstream even more because JPM published a record three special solicitations against it. A high-scoring proposal that gets three special solicitations against it by the JPM board of directors must be doing something right. The 47% vote also represented 50-plus percent support majority vote from the professional investors who had access to independent proxy voting advice. Any proposal that gets above 45% support has to get a majority vote from the most informed shareholders because there is an overwhelming abundance of automatic against votes from the JPM shares that have no access to independent proxy voting advice. The JPM board of directors also disingenuously put forth a deceptive policy to dupe the JPM shareholders who have no access to independent proxy voting advice.
That said, JPM could always have one person fill the two most important jobs at JPM as long as the JPM directors gave almost any excuse to violate its so-called policy. Putting forth a deceptive policy is worse than taking no accent at all in response to a high-scoring JPM shareholder proposal. JPM also needs to take the role of the lead director seriously. JPM's so-called lead director violates the most important attribute of a lead director: independence. As director tenure goes up, director independence goes down. Stephen Burke, the JPM lead director, has 21 years director tenure. The JPM lead director may be close to setting a record for long tenure by a lead director. Mr. Burke was the target of $186 million against votes at the 2024 JPM annual meeting. Only Todd Combs received more against votes than Mr. Burke.
Yet JPM still claims it has a robust lead director. Mr. Burke is also an advisor to Comcast, which has a shareholder rights score of 10, which is the worst possible score for shareholder rights. Please vote yes, independent board chairman proposal four.
Thank you. We oppose this resolution. Our reasons for doing so appear on pages 86 and 87 of the proxy statement. Proposal five was submitted by Paul Rissman. We've been advised that Mr. Rissman will present this proposal in a prerecorded statement. Please play the statement.
My name is Paul Rissman. I'm presenting proposal five on the 2025 JPMorgan Chase proxy. Proposal five requests that the board of directors of JPMorgan Chase issue a report disclosing whether and how the company addresses the potential risks and opportunities related to the social impacts of JPMorgan Chase's transition finance efforts. A report on the social implications of transition finance makes sense for shareholders. Climate transition finance is big business. JPMorgan Chase has made a trillion-dollar commitment to transition finance. Commitments to climate transition finance by competing institutions include a trillion by Bank of America and $750 billion by Morgan Stanley, among others in the U.S. The world's largest asset manager, BlackRock, calls the low-carbon transition one of five mega forces set to spur a massive reallocation of capital as energy systems are rewired, which creates major opportunities and risks for investors.
Another major asset manager, State Street Corporation, exclaims that the energy transition presents what is perhaps a once-in-a-century opportunity for companies and investors. Yet transition finance, if done without careful consideration, can be fraught with risk. Many transition mineral mining projects are located near indigenous or traditional community lands, for example, increasing the danger of human rights impacts from pollution or land grabbing. The Business and Human Rights Resource Center is tracking 60 lawsuits filed against energy transition projects. A study of the Environmental Justice Atlas database found that one quarter of projects opposed by environmental defenders were stopped due to protest, litigation, and other forms of popular mobilization. Forced labor has been found in polysilicon supply chains, leading to some shipments that were prevented from entering the US. Coal plant retirements, often financed by the private sector, have been held up due to worker protests.
Despite these numerous threats to transition strategy initiatives, in the opinion of the proponent, the company has failed to adequately describe whether and how it addresses transition of workers and fairness to communities in its transition finance strategy. JPMorgan Chase investors deserve to know whether the firm's transition finance opportunities have been selected with due care and attention to these risks. Unfortunately, we are left in the dark on this topic. Moreover, diversified investors concerned with the financial damage that climate change will wreak upon their long-term portfolio performance may wish to pronounce on the effectiveness of JPMorgan Chase's climate transition work. The impact of increasing carbon emissions on the global economy in the absence of any further decarbonization efforts may reduce the cumulative investment returns to pension funds by 30-50% by 2040, according to ORTEC.
Thank you. We oppose this resolution. Our reasons for doing so appear on pages 89 and 90 of the proxy statement. We'll now turn to the shareholder questions regarding the proposals. I'd like to invite Mikael Grubb, Head of Investor Relations, to read questions from our shareholders.
Thank you, Stacey. We will pause for a brief moment to review the submitted questions. Our first question regarding proposal number five is submitted by Isaac Wooller. Thank you for opposing the anti-fiduciary activism in proposal five. How does JPMorgan view its approach to financing energy in light of its commitment to both political neutrality and fiduciary duty?
We are one of the largest financers of both traditional and green energy. We believe in supporting energy production from all sources to meet the critical needs across the globe. We have frameworks that identify client business models that allow us to think deeply about concentrated environmental and social risks. When those flag, we require further focus. We engage with clients, but we ultimately do what is in the best interest of long-term shareholder value.
We will pause again to make sure that there are no more questions submitted with respect to the proposals. Stacey, we have now addressed all questions that were submitted with respect to the proposals.
Thank you. It is now 10:21 A.M., and I'll declare the polls closed. I will now read the preliminary vote results that were received immediately prior to the meeting. The final voting results will be reported on a Form 8-K that will be filed with the SEC, also with the minutes of the meeting. With respect to the election of directors, all directors were elected, and each director received the majority of the votes cast for and against. No director received less than 93% of the votes cast. With respect to the other proposals today, the results will be the percentage voted for each proposal based on the shares marked for, against, or abstain. The vote for approval of the advisory resolution for executive compensation is 91% for. The vote for ratification of our independent registered public accounting firm is 93.4% for.
The vote for the proposal for an independent board chairman is 36.6% for. The vote for the proposal on the report on social impacts of transition finance is 10.6% for. That concludes all of the formal business. Jamie, if you want to adjourn the meeting, now is the time.
Stacey, thank you. This concludes the business of the meeting, and the 2025 annual meeting of shareholders is hereby adjourned.
Thank you. We're now ready to respond to general questions and comments submitted by shareholders. As I mentioned earlier, we've set aside 30 minutes to respond. As a reminder, if you have questions about services we provide or your question is in regard to a personal matter, we'll be responding to those questions separately after the meeting. Mikael, do we have any questions at this time?
Yes, thank you, Stacey. We'll pause for a brief moment to review the submitted questions. Our first question comes from Daniel Harman, and it reads as follows: A business reputation is at the heart of its success. President Trump's tariffs and flagrantly illegal actions are undermining the reputation of the country. How does the company intend to weather these external forces, and what is it doing to protect the well-being and rights of its employees?
Thank you, Mikael. I'm not going to weigh in on politics, but I would say we remain cautious in light of the challenging and complex environment due to several factors: tariffs, the risk of accelerating trade wars, growing geopolitical tensions and wars, a large ongoing fiscal deficit both here in the U.S. and fundamentally around the world, still the uncertain effect of quantitative tightening, a tax policy which hasn't been set yet, among many unknowns.
Our next question comes from Bill Rasmussen, and he reads as follows: Request that all political contributions be stopped. The money would better serve the company if used for one: local food banks, two: an internship program for hard-to-fill positions, or three: early upgrades or additional spending on cyber.
Thank you, Mikael. Responsible corporate citizenship demands a commitment to a healthy and informed democracy through civic and community involvement. Because of the impact public policy can have on our businesses, employees, communities, and customers, we engage with policymakers in order to advance and protect the long-term interests of the firm and the country. The only corporate contributions the firm makes are to support or oppose state or local ballot initiatives that could materially affect the firm, such as contributions made last year to oppose a ballot initiative that would have significantly increased the firm's tax burden in Oregon. The firm's policies prohibit the use of corporate funds for making political contributions to candidates, political parties, and PACs. The firm's PAC, which does make political contributions, is funded entirely by the voluntary contributions of eligible employees.
Our next question comes from Sylvia Gooden, who asks: Jamie is always boasting about profits, but we, the employees, are not seeing the fruits of the company's success. Yearly compensation never matches up to the company's yearly earnings. Employees should not be receiving cent raises. We need living wages. Let employees decide how they want to receive their year-end award for company success, not it automatically being placed into our 401(k) account without giving us an option.
I object to the notion that we boast about profits. We boast about building a great company for our communities, our employees, our customers, and our countries. We could continue to attract and retain the highest quality talent. We support the professional development and career growth of our employees through training and additional education programs and provide market-competitive compensation, benefits, and wellness programs. We believe that helping our employees care for their total well-being, financial future, and the people who matter to them. That is why we offer a well-rounded and exceptional suite of benefits programs and resources that go way beyond the basics. We offer a comprehensive benefits package, which is valued on average at over $19,000 per employee for this population. In the last seven years, we've more than doubled our average minimum pay, with steady increases.
Our programs are wide-ranging and include medical care for our employees and family members, retirement plans, mental health support, and family-building benefits, to name a few. This year, we again provide a special award to eligible employees globally. We increase the award to a maximum of $1,000. We believe that awards to 401(k) participants are consistent with our focus on financial wellness. The firm continues to invest in these programs each year around the globe, and we continue to support our employees in many ways.
Our next question comes from Sherry Combs, who asks: Would the board consider appointing a dedicated liaison from the retail employee base to provide direct, unfiltered insight into the impact of new products and policies? This individual could serve as a bridge between frontline employees and leadership, offering a regular, prepared report on real challenges, successes, and concerns without fear of reprisals. Current survey tools often focus heavily on local management, which skews feedback, as many employees are reluctant to criticize supervisors they respect or fear retaliation. Furthermore, the existing feedback platform is underutilized for similar reasons. A trusted, protected liaison could significantly strengthen morale, enhance transparency, and ensure that both employee and customer concerns are more effectively addressed.
I'm disappointed to hear that anyone feels like they're not allowed to give feedback. We want everyone to give feedback. We have multiple ways to do it, both customer feedback and employee feedback. You can give some of that anonymously. Try to follow up on everything as we build a great company. If you fear any form of reprisal, please call our general counsel, and they'll look into it.
Our next question comes from Ron Ben Ezer, who asks: As the market anticipates a shift toward lower interest rates, how do you expect this to impact JPMorgan's net interest income and overall earnings in the coming quarters? Additionally, how is the bank positioning itself to mitigate potential margin compression and sustain profitability in a lower-rate environment?
I think the market expectations may not be exactly what happens. We actually prepare the firm for multiple ranges of outcomes on interest rates, and we think we are fully prepared to handle a wide range of outcomes, whether they're what the market expects or what it does not expect.
We're pausing again for a moment to review the submitted questions. Our next question comes from Gerald Bernstein, and he reads as follows: Would you consider a stock split or stock dividend this year?
The board considers that every time it meets, and we'll let you know if and when they decide it's the right thing to do for shareholders.
Our next question comes from an anonymous shareholder, and it reads as follows: When will JPM get a new lead director?
We think our board is doing an exceptional job for this company, including the lead director. I think that shows up in the actual results over an extended period of time.
Our next question comes from Hannah Poore, and it reads as follows: JPMorgan Chase recently brought on a highly regarded client scientist, Dr. Sarah Kapnick, to advise on climate factors in decision-making. It must be noted that the science is clear that a fast, fair phase-out of fossil fuels is necessary for any plausible scenario to meet global climate goals and reduce catastrophic shocks to human society and the economy. Yet JPMorgan Chase remains one of the largest investors in fossil fuels, including in companies that are expanding their production of fossil fuels and walking back climate targets. Many of these same companies continue to spread disinformation about climate change and lobby against climate action, as outlined in a new report from the Union of Concerned Scientists: Decades of Deceit. How does JPMorgan Chase intend to incorporate serious climate science into its investment decisions going forward?
Thank you for the question. As I said earlier, we have frameworks around risk and diligence that allow us to look at clients' models. Where there are concentrated environmental or social risks, we do a deeper dive. We work with the client, we engage on a way forward, and we ultimately make a business decision that is in long-term shareholder interest.
The next question comes from Samantha Martin from the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, and it reads as follows: I just wanted to express the appreciation of the Carpenters for the positive work relationship with the company that has afforded our members employment opportunities with fair wages and benefits. As long-term investors through our pension funds, we support the board and management team and their strategic plans for long-term corporate value growth.
Thank you, Samantha, for your comments.
Thank you.
Our next question comes from shareholder Peter Keyser: Why not stop compromising by supporting abortion activities and travel, DEI, de-banking, and LGBTQ policies with a 100% human rights campaign score by dropping to zero? Do not risk share loss like Disney. Provide quality, moral services, and reasonable return, keeping your fiduciary duty to us shareholders.
Thank you for the question. It is our intent to make green as possible for everyone everywhere. We strictly prohibit discrimination and want to foster an inclusive environment. We always make sure our hiring, compensation, and promotion practices are merit-based, and our products and services are aligned with compliance and value to shareholders. We appreciate the question.
Our next question comes from Mahernosh Damanis: What is your assessment of JPM increasing dividends and the growth of the economy?
We've increased dividends multiple times in the last couple of years, and as long as we continue to be able to grow our profitability over time, we will be recommending the board to increase dividends, and they kind of make that decision every time they meet.
Our next question comes from Karen Chukwu: Thank you so much for the opportunity to join the virtual meeting. Are clerical/data analyst jobs at JPMorgan Chase likely to get automated?
We are a big user of AI, and we find it enhances many jobs and that it creates more productivity. It may very well, in some categories, reduce some of those jobs. I do not think we should be sticking our head in the sand. I think we should be prepared to, as technology always does, retrain our people, redeploy our people. We are pretty confident over time that people will not necessarily lose their jobs because of AI, as long as we are very open-eyed.
Our next question comes from Nate Myers: Your energy supply financing ratio claims you fund $1.29 in green energy for every dollar in high-carbon projects. Why are you prioritizing that ratio instead of funding based on ROI, energy reliability, or client demand?
I think we use all those categories to finance, and the green is also a for-profit venture, not a gift.
Our next questions have been submitted in a similar forum by three different shareholders. Their question is about tariffs, particularly between the U.S. and China, and the impact on JPMorgan Chase's global growth forecast and investing in emerging markets.
I'll just refer to what our economists say. They expect that it may add a little bit to inflation and slow down growth a little bit. Their odds of a recession are about 50%. We don't really know the full outcome of tariffs yet, and I think when we do, we'll find out exactly what it is. I would also like to point out that the world has lots of other factors going on that are going to affect growth and inflation, not just the tariffs.
Our next question comes from Javier De Jesus: As private credit grows, how is JPMorgan's investment banking arm competing with alternative asset managers disrupting traditional lending?
We are very agnostic. We actually try to look at the interview of the world from the customer. We actually offer the customer both traditional bank lending and direct lending and let them decide based on what they think the pros and the cons of each one are. We are competing that way. The goal is not necessarily to make direct lending loans. It is to have satisfied customers who generally not just do loan business with us, but do other businesses too, like payments.
Our next question comes from Mike Telford: What is your opinion of the discussion on Glass Lewis policy discussion in Congress?
I think Congress should legalize both ISS and Glass Lewis.
Okay. We're pausing again for a moment to review the submitted questions. Our next question comes from Cherie DeLory: I would like to say I think the current board is doing a great job. I would like to learn more from all of you. Thank you for your time and transparency.
Thank you for your kind words.
It looks like we have no more questions now, Mikael. Our discussion period has now concluded. If you submitted a question that was not responded to or if you'd like additional information, we invite you to contact our investor relations team at the email address included on our website. Jamie, would you like to say a few words?
Yes. Stacey, thank you. We greatly appreciate the views of all of our shareholders and how thoughtful they are in engaging in this process. The entire board takes their feedback very seriously and will continue to incorporate their input in how we govern the company. We are going to go back to work and try to make the company even better tomorrow than it was today. Thank you for all your support.
This concludes today's webcast. You may now disconnect. The host has ended this call. Good.